Discovery BoxGenesis 31:38-40
Context31:38 “I have been with you for the past twenty years. Your ewes and female goats have not miscarried, nor have I eaten rams from your flocks. 31:39 Animals torn by wild beasts I never brought to you; I always absorbed the loss myself. 1 You always made me pay for every missing animal, 2 whether it was taken by day or at night. 31:40 I was consumed by scorching heat 3 during the day and by piercing cold 4 at night, and I went without sleep. 5
Genesis 33:13
Context33:13 But Jacob 6 said to him, “My lord knows that the children are young, 7 and that I have to look after the sheep and cattle that are nursing their young. 8 If they are driven too hard for even a single day, all the animals will die.
Genesis 33:1
Context33:1 Jacob looked up 9 and saw that Esau was coming 10 along with four hundred men. So he divided the children among Leah, Rachel, and the two female servants.
Genesis 17:1
Context17:1 When Abram was 99 years old, 11 the Lord appeared to him and said, 12 “I am the sovereign God. 13 Walk 14 before me 15 and be blameless. 16
Genesis 17:1
Context17:1 When Abram was 99 years old, 17 the Lord appeared to him and said, 18 “I am the sovereign God. 19 Walk 20 before me 21 and be blameless. 22
Genesis 27:29-31
Context27:29 May peoples serve you
and nations bow down to you.
You will be 23 lord 24 over your brothers,
and the sons of your mother will bow down to you. 25
May those who curse you be cursed,
and those who bless you be blessed.”
27:30 Isaac had just finished blessing Jacob, and Jacob had scarcely left 26 his father’s 27 presence, when his brother Esau returned from the hunt. 28 27:31 He also prepared some tasty food and brought it to his father. Esau 29 said to him, “My father, get up 30 and eat some of your son’s wild game. Then you can bless me.” 31
Genesis 27:2
Context27:2 Isaac 32 said, “Since 33 I am so old, I could die at any time. 34
Genesis 26:10
Context26:10 Then Abimelech exclaimed, “What in the world have you done to us? 35 One of the men 36 might easily have had sexual relations with 37 your wife, and you would have brought guilt on us!”
Ezekiel 34:22-24
Context34:22 I will save my sheep; they will no longer be prey. I will judge between one sheep and another.
34:23 I will set one shepherd over them, and he will feed them – namely, my servant David. 38 He will feed them and will be their shepherd. 34:24 I, the Lord, will be their God, and my servant David will be prince 39 among them; I, the Lord, have spoken!
Ezekiel 34:31
Context34:31 And you, my sheep, the sheep of my pasture, are my people, 40 and I am your God, declares the sovereign Lord.’”
John 21:15-17
Context21:15 Then when they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, 41 do you love me more than these do?” 42 He replied, 43 “Yes, Lord, you know I love you.” 44 Jesus 45 told him, “Feed my lambs.” 21:16 Jesus 46 said 47 a second time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” He replied, 48 “Yes, Lord, you know I love you.” Jesus 49 told him, “Shepherd my sheep.” 21:17 Jesus 50 said 51 a third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” Peter was distressed 52 that Jesus 53 asked 54 him a third time, “Do you love me?” and said, 55 “Lord, you know everything. You know that I love you.” Jesus 56 replied, 57 “Feed my sheep.
John 21:1
Context21:1 After this 58 Jesus revealed himself again to the disciples by the Sea of Tiberias. 59 Now this is how he did so. 60
John 5:2
Context5:2 Now there is 61 in Jerusalem by the Sheep Gate 62 a pool called Bethzatha 63 in Aramaic, 64 which has five covered walkways. 65
[31:39] 1 tn The imperfect verbal form indicates that this was a customary or typical action.
[31:39] 2 tn Heb “from my hand you exacted it.” The imperfect verbal form again indicates that this was a customary or typical action. The words “for every missing animal” are supplied in the translation for clarity; the following clause in Hebrew, “stolen by day or stolen by night,” probably means “stolen by wild beasts” and refers to the same animals “torn by wild beasts” in the previous clause, although it may refer to animals stolen by people. The translation used here, “missing,” is ambiguous enough to cover either eventuality.
[31:40] 4 tn Heb “frost, ice,” though when contrasted with the חֹרֶב (khorev, “drought, parching heat”) of the day, “piercing cold” is more appropriate as a contrast.
[31:40] 5 tn Heb “and my sleep fled from my eyes.”
[33:13] 6 tn Heb “he”; the referent (Jacob) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[33:13] 8 tn Heb “and the sheep and the cattle nursing [are] upon me.”
[33:1] 9 tn Heb “and Jacob lifted up his eyes.”
[33:1] 10 tn Or “and look, Esau was coming.” By the use of the particle הִנֵּה (hinneh, “look”), the narrator invites the reader to view the scene through Jacob’s eyes.
[17:1] 11 tn Heb “the son of ninety-nine years.”
[17:1] 12 tn Heb “appeared to Abram and said to him.” The proper name has been replaced by the pronoun (“him”) and the final phrase “to him” has been left untranslated for stylistic reasons.
[17:1] 13 tn The name אֵל שַׁדַּי (’el shadday, “El Shaddai”) has often been translated “God Almighty,” primarily because Jerome translated it omnipotens (“all powerful”) in the Latin Vulgate. There has been much debate over the meaning of the name. For discussion see W. F. Albright, “The Names Shaddai and Abram,” JBL 54 (1935): 173-210; R. Gordis, “The Biblical Root sdy-sd,” JTS 41 (1940): 34-43; and especially T. N. D. Mettinger, In Search of God, 69-72. Shaddai/El Shaddai is the sovereign king of the world who grants, blesses, and judges. In the Book of Genesis he blesses the patriarchs with fertility and promises numerous descendants. Outside Genesis he both blesses/protects and takes away life/happiness. The patriarchs knew God primarily as El Shaddai (Exod 6:3). While the origin and meaning of this name are uncertain (see discussion below) its significance is clear. The name is used in contexts where God appears as the source of fertility and life. In Gen 17:1-8 he appeared to Abram, introduced himself as El Shaddai, and announced his intention to make the patriarch fruitful. In the role of El Shaddai God repeated these words (now elevated to the status of a decree) to Jacob (35:11). Earlier Isaac had pronounced a blessing on Jacob in which he asked El Shaddai to make Jacob fruitful (28:3). Jacob later prayed that his sons would be treated with mercy when they returned to Egypt with Benjamin (43:14). The fertility theme is not as apparent here, though one must remember that Jacob viewed Benjamin as the sole remaining son of the favored and once-barren Rachel (see 29:31; 30:22-24; 35:16-18). It is quite natural that he would appeal to El Shaddai to preserve Benjamin’s life, for it was El Shaddai’s miraculous power which made it possible for Rachel to give him sons in the first place. In 48:3 Jacob, prior to blessing Joseph’s sons, told him how El Shaddai appeared to him at Bethel (see Gen 28) and promised to make him fruitful. When blessing Joseph on his deathbed Jacob referred to Shaddai (we should probably read “El Shaddai,” along with a few Hebrew
[17:1] 14 tn Or “Live out your life.” The Hebrew verb translated “walk” is the Hitpael; it means “to walk back and forth; to walk about; to live out one’s life.”
[17:1] 15 tn Or “in my presence.”
[17:1] 16 tn There are two imperatives here: “walk…and be blameless [or “perfect”].” The second imperative may be purely sequential (see the translation) or consequential: “walk before me and then you will be blameless.” How one interprets the sequence depends on the meaning of “walk before”: (1) If it simply refers in a neutral way to serving the
[17:1] 17 tn Heb “the son of ninety-nine years.”
[17:1] 18 tn Heb “appeared to Abram and said to him.” The proper name has been replaced by the pronoun (“him”) and the final phrase “to him” has been left untranslated for stylistic reasons.
[17:1] 19 tn The name אֵל שַׁדַּי (’el shadday, “El Shaddai”) has often been translated “God Almighty,” primarily because Jerome translated it omnipotens (“all powerful”) in the Latin Vulgate. There has been much debate over the meaning of the name. For discussion see W. F. Albright, “The Names Shaddai and Abram,” JBL 54 (1935): 173-210; R. Gordis, “The Biblical Root sdy-sd,” JTS 41 (1940): 34-43; and especially T. N. D. Mettinger, In Search of God, 69-72. Shaddai/El Shaddai is the sovereign king of the world who grants, blesses, and judges. In the Book of Genesis he blesses the patriarchs with fertility and promises numerous descendants. Outside Genesis he both blesses/protects and takes away life/happiness. The patriarchs knew God primarily as El Shaddai (Exod 6:3). While the origin and meaning of this name are uncertain (see discussion below) its significance is clear. The name is used in contexts where God appears as the source of fertility and life. In Gen 17:1-8 he appeared to Abram, introduced himself as El Shaddai, and announced his intention to make the patriarch fruitful. In the role of El Shaddai God repeated these words (now elevated to the status of a decree) to Jacob (35:11). Earlier Isaac had pronounced a blessing on Jacob in which he asked El Shaddai to make Jacob fruitful (28:3). Jacob later prayed that his sons would be treated with mercy when they returned to Egypt with Benjamin (43:14). The fertility theme is not as apparent here, though one must remember that Jacob viewed Benjamin as the sole remaining son of the favored and once-barren Rachel (see 29:31; 30:22-24; 35:16-18). It is quite natural that he would appeal to El Shaddai to preserve Benjamin’s life, for it was El Shaddai’s miraculous power which made it possible for Rachel to give him sons in the first place. In 48:3 Jacob, prior to blessing Joseph’s sons, told him how El Shaddai appeared to him at Bethel (see Gen 28) and promised to make him fruitful. When blessing Joseph on his deathbed Jacob referred to Shaddai (we should probably read “El Shaddai,” along with a few Hebrew
[17:1] 20 tn Or “Live out your life.” The Hebrew verb translated “walk” is the Hitpael; it means “to walk back and forth; to walk about; to live out one’s life.”
[17:1] 21 tn Or “in my presence.”
[17:1] 22 tn There are two imperatives here: “walk…and be blameless [or “perfect”].” The second imperative may be purely sequential (see the translation) or consequential: “walk before me and then you will be blameless.” How one interprets the sequence depends on the meaning of “walk before”: (1) If it simply refers in a neutral way to serving the
[27:29] 23 tn Heb “and be.” The verb is an imperative, which is used rhetorically in this oracle of blessing. It is an invitation to exercise authority his brothers and indicates that he is granted such authority by the patriarch of the family. Furthermore, the blessing enables the recipient to accomplish this.
[27:29] 24 tn The Hebrew word is גְבִיר (gevir, “lord, mighty one”). The one being blessed will be stronger and therefore more powerful than his brother. See Gen 25:23. The feminine form of this rare noun means “mistress” or “queen-mother.”
[27:29] 25 tn Following the imperative, the prefixed verbal form (which is either an imperfect or a jussive) with the prefixed conjunction indicates purpose or result.
[27:30] 26 tn The use of the infinitive absolute before the finite form of the verb makes the construction emphatic.
[27:30] 27 tn Heb “the presence of Isaac his father.” The repetition of the proper name (“Isaac”) was
[27:30] 28 tn Heb “and Esau his brother came from his hunt.”
[27:31] 29 tn Heb “and he said to his father”; the referent of “he” (Esau) has been specified in the translation for clarity, while the words “his father” have been replaced by the pronoun “him” for stylistic reasons.
[27:31] 30 tn Or “arise” (i.e., sit up).
[27:31] 31 tn Heb “so that your soul may bless me.”
[27:2] 32 tn Heb “he”; the referent (Isaac) is specified in the translation for clarity.
[27:2] 33 tn The particle הִנֵּה (hinneh, “look”) here introduces a logically foundational statement, upon which the coming instruction will be based.
[27:2] 34 tn Heb “I do not know the day of my death.”
[26:10] 35 tn Heb “What is this you have done to us?” The Hebrew demonstrative pronoun “this” adds emphasis: “What in the world have you done to us?” (R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 24, §118).
[26:10] 37 tn The Hebrew verb means “to lie down.” Here the expression “lie with” or “sleep with” is euphemistic for “have sexual relations with.”
[34:23] 38 sn The messianic king is here called “David” (see Jer 30:9 and Hos 3:5, as well as Isa 11:1 and Mic 5:2) because he will fulfill the Davidic royal ideal depicted in the prophets and royal psalms (see Ps 2, 89).
[34:24] 39 sn The messianic king (“David”) is called both “king” and “prince” in 37:24-25. The use of the term “prince” for this king facilitates the contrast between this ideal ruler and the Davidic “princes” denounced in earlier prophecies (see 7:27; 12:10, 12; 19:1; 21:25; 22:6, 25).
[34:31] 40 tn Heb, “the sheep of my pasture, you are human.” See 36:37-38 for a similar expression. The possessive pronoun “my” is supplied in the translation to balance “I am your God” in the next clause.
[21:15] 41 tc The majority of
[21:15] 42 tn To whom (or what) does “these” (τούτων, toutwn) refer? Three possibilities are suggested: (1) τούτων should be understood as neuter, “these things,” referring to the boats, nets, and fishing gear nearby. In light of Peter’s statement in 21:3, “I am going fishing,” some have understood Peter to have renounced his commission in light of his denials of Jesus. Jesus, as he restores Peter and forgives him for his denials, is asking Peter if he really loves his previous vocation more than he loves Jesus. Three things may be said in evaluation of this view: (a) it is not at all necessary to understand Peter’s statement in 21:3 as a renouncement of his discipleship, as this view of the meaning of τούτων would imply; (b) it would probably be more likely that the verb would be repeated in such a construction (see 7:31 for an example where the verb is repeated); and (c) as R. E. Brown has observed (John [AB], 2:1103) by Johannine standards the choice being offered to Peter between material things and the risen Jesus would seem rather ridiculous, especially after the disciples had realized whom it was they were dealing with (the Lord, see v. 12). (2) τούτων refers to the other disciples, meaning “Do you love me more than you love these other disciples?” The same objection mentioned as (c) under (1) would apply here: Could the author, in light of the realization of who Jesus is which has come to the disciples after the resurrection, and which he has just mentioned in 21:12, seriously present Peter as being offered a choice between the other disciples and the risen Jesus? This leaves option (3), that τούτων refers to the other disciples, meaning “Do you love me more than these other disciples do?” It seems likely that there is some irony here: Peter had boasted in 13:37, “I will lay down my life for you,” and the synoptics present Peter as boasting even more explicitly of his loyalty to Jesus (“Even if they all fall away, I will not,” Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29). Thus the semantic force of what Jesus asks Peter here amounts to something like “Now, after you have denied me three times, as I told you you would, can you still affirm that you love me more than these other disciples do?” The addition of the auxiliary verb “do” in the translation is used to suggest to the English reader the third interpretation, which is the preferred one.
[21:15] 43 tn Grk “He said to him.”
[21:15] 44 tn Is there a significant difference in meaning between the two words for love used in the passage, ἀγαπάω and φιλέω (agapaw and filew)? Aside from Origen, who saw a distinction in the meaning of the two words, most of the Greek Fathers like Chrysostom and Cyril of Alexandria, saw no real difference of meaning. Neither did Augustine nor the translators of the Itala (Old Latin). This was also the view of the Reformation Greek scholars Erasmus and Grotius. The suggestion that a distinction in meaning should be seen comes primarily from a number of British scholars of the 19th century, especially Trench, Westcott, and Plummer. It has been picked up by others such as Spicq, Lenski, and Hendriksen. But most modern scholars decline to see a real difference in the meaning of the two words in this context, among them Bernard, Moffatt, Bonsirven, Bultmann, Barrett, Brown, Morris, Haenchen, and Beasley-Murray. There are three significant reasons for seeing no real difference in the meaning of ἀγαπάω and φιλέω in these verses: (1) the author has a habit of introducing slight stylistic variations in repeated material without any significant difference in meaning (compare, for example, 3:3 with 3:5, and 7:34 with 13:33). An examination of the uses of ἀγαπάω and φιλέω in the Fourth Gospel seems to indicate a general interchangeability between the two. Both terms are used of God’s love for man (3:16, 16:27); of the Father’s love for the Son (3:35, 5:20); of Jesus’ love for men (11:5, 11:3); of the love of men for men (13:34, 15:19); and of the love of men for Jesus (8:42, 16:27). (2) If (as seems probable) the original conversation took place in Aramaic (or possibly Hebrew), there would not have been any difference expressed because both Aramaic and Hebrew have only one basic word for love. In the LXX both ἀγαπάω and φιλέω are used to translate the same Hebrew word for love, although ἀγαπάω is more frequent. It is significant that in the Syriac version of the NT only one verb is used to translate vv. 15-17 (Syriac is very similar linguistically to Palestinian Aramaic). (3) Peter’s answers to the questions asked with ἀγαπάω are ‘yes’ even though he answers using the verb φιλέω. If he is being asked to love Jesus on a higher or more spiritual level his answers give no indication of this, and one would be forced to say (in order to maintain a consistent distinction between the two verbs) that Jesus finally concedes defeat and accepts only the lower form of love which is all that Peter is capable of offering. Thus it seems best to regard the interchange between ἀγαπάω and φιλέω in these verses as a minor stylistic variation of the author, consistent with his use of minor variations in repeated material elsewhere, and not indicative of any real difference in meaning. Thus no attempt has been made to distinguish between the two Greek words in the translation.
[21:15] 45 tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[21:16] 46 tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[21:16] 47 tn Grk “said again.” The word “again” (when used in connection with the phrase “a second time”) is redundant and has not been translated.
[21:16] 48 tn Grk “He said to him.”
[21:16] 49 tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[21:17] 50 tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[21:17] 51 tn Grk “said to him.” The words “to him” are clear from the context and slightly redundant in English.
[21:17] 53 tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[21:17] 55 tn Grk “and said to him.” The words “to him” are clear from the context and slightly redundant in English.
[21:17] 56 tc ‡ Most witnesses, especially later ones (A Θ Ψ Ë13 Ï), read ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς (Jo Ihsou", “Jesus”) here, while B C have ᾿Ιησοῦς without the article and א D W Ë1 33 565 al lat lack both. Because of the rapid verbal exchange in this pericope, “Jesus” is virtually required for clarity, providing a temptation to scribes to add the name. Further, the name normally occurs with the article. Although it is possible that B C accidentally omitted the article with the name, it is just as likely that they added the simple name to the text for clarity’s sake, while other witnesses added the article as well. The omission of ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς thus seems most likely to be authentic. NA27 includes the words in brackets, indicating some doubts as to their authenticity.
[21:17] 57 tn Grk “Jesus said to him.”
[21:1] 58 tn The time reference indicated by μετὰ ταῦτα (meta tauta) is indefinite, in comparison with the specific “after eight days” (μεθ᾿ ἡμέρας ὀκτώ, meq’ Jhmera" oktw) between the two postresurrection appearances of Jesus in 20:26.
[21:1] 59 sn The Sea of Tiberias is another name for the Sea of Galilee (see 6:1).
[21:1] 60 tn Grk “how he revealed himself.”
[5:2] 61 tn Regarding the use of the present tense ἐστιν (estin) and its implications for the dating of the Gospel of John, see the article by D. B. Wallace, “John 5,2 and the Date of the Fourth Gospel,” Bib 71 (1990): 177-205.
[5:2] 62 tn The site of the miracle is also something of a problem: προβατικῇ (probatikh) is usually taken as a reference to the Sheep Gate near the temple. Some (R. E. Brown and others) would place the word κολυμβήθρα (kolumbhqra) with προβατικῇ to read “in Jerusalem, by the Sheep Pool, there is (another pool) with the Hebrew name.” This would imply that there is reference to two pools in the context rather than only one. This does not seem necessary (although it is a grammatical possibility). The gender of the words does not help since both are feminine (as is the participle ἐπιλεγομένη [epilegomenh]). Note however that Brown’s suggestion would require a feminine word to be supplied (for the participle ἐπιλεγομένη to modify). The traditional understanding of the phrase as a reference to the Sheep Gate near the temple appears more probably correct.
[5:2] 63 tc Some
